Extending Permanent Normal Trade Relations to Vietnam

EXTENDING PERMANENT NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TO VIETNAM -- (House of Representatives - November 13, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5602. Opposing PNTR for Vietnam is in the interest of the Vietnamese and the American people. As you know, Vietnam has been subject to a trade agreement with the United States since 2001. How has it gone? If you care about Vietnam, then you should care to know that Vietnam has a lot to lose as poor as that country may be.

Vietnam had a growth rate of 9 percent between 1993 and 1997, the year the Asian financial crisis hit. In other words, under the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, economic growth was very respectable, but the global experience of developing countries with WTO roles is disappointing at best.

During the WTO decade, that is 1995 to 2005, the number and percentage of people living on less than $2 a day has jumped in South Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and the Caribbean. The rate of worldwide poverty reduction has slowed. Per capita income growth in poor nations decline when they sign up for the WTO.

And structural adjustment policies by the IMF and the World Bank also cause the economic situation of the people in those countries that sign up for the WTO to be impaired.

Per capita growth from 1980 to 2000 fell to half of what occurred between 1960 and 1980, 1980 prior to the imposition of the WTO-IMF package. I worry about the Vietnamese people if the PNTR should pass. If you care about Vietnam, then you should care to know that the PNTR could have the effect of causing, one, millions of peasants to be thrown off the land as agricultural supports are withdrawn; two, millions of workers to lose their jobs as state enterprises wither in the face of foreign competition or downsize and speed up operations in an effort to stay competitive.

Privatization, right on its way. At the beginning of this year, I was one of the Democratic representatives chosen by the Speaker of the House to visit Southeast Asia, and we visited Vietnam.

One of the things that struck me during the visit, particularly to the south part of Vietnam, was the ubiquitous nature of the bicycle. People use bicycles as a primary means of getting around, and it is linked to the culture. There are rules that impose high tariffs and taxes on bringing cars in to operate in Vietnam. Those rules and tariffs are just going to be wiped off the books, pushed aside.

This agreement is going to have a profound impact in creating a transition in the culture of Vietnam away from a use of an effective and efficient means of transportation, towards choking streets that are already clogged with a lot of people, with automobiles at a time that we should be thinking about the relationship between trade and global climate change.

I mean, after all, the WTO does not permit human rights, workers' rights or environmental quality principles to be put into trade agreements. So here we are celebrating the growth of free trade at the same time the worldwide economic crisis continues.

Somebody has got to make the connection between demanding that the WTO have environmental quality principles written into these agreements, and you are going to see countries like Vietnam suffer as a result of that lack. Have we not had enough of the folly of the World Trade Organization? Have we not lost enough good-paying jobs in this country? Have we not learned that the U.S. cannot for long be the world's biggest market and biggest consumer if our people are not making wealth through manufacturing? I mean, we need an American manufacturing policy where the maintenance of steel, automotive, aerospace and agriculture is seen as vital to our Nation's national security.

Mr. Speaker, if you care about jobs in the United States, then you should be concerned to learn that the U.S. balance of trade with Vietnam has gone from a surplus in 1993 to a deficit of over $5 billion.

As Chinese manufacturers move south to Vietnam in search of even cheaper labor, more and more exports will come from Vietnam to the United States and more and more jobs in the U.S. will disappear. Wake up, Congress. We have got close to an $800 billion trade deficit, and this bill just keeps going in the same direction.

Goodbye, American jobs. No workers rights. No human rights. No environmental quality principles. Why are we doing this?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/